Skip to main content

Assessment of Compliance Performance of Environmental Regulations of Industries in Tuzla (Istanbul, Turkey)

Abstract

Although environmental management in Turkey is evolving, its performance needs to be assessed in terms of the extent to which polluters and dischargers are complying with their legal obligations. In spite of this necessity, however, not a single study evaluating the effectiveness of command-and-control strategy of environmental management has been conducted. It is for this reason that it was decided to conduct an analysis of the impact of environmental legislation on a major industrial area in Turkey. Accordingly, Turkish environmental legislation was analyzed, and all relevant obligations and responsibilities of industry are identified. Based upon this appraisal, a questionnaire was prepared and used to conduct interviews in Tuzla, Istanbul. From the results, it can be concluded that environmental compliance performance of industry is low. The total of 92 parameters has been questioned. Fifty-three parameters have been found as satisfactory compliance, whereas 26 parameters have been classified as partial compliance and 13 as unsatisfactory compliance. The most important reason for inadequate performance is the lack of an effective national and local environmental compliance management system. The other leading reasons are found to be low-level environmental consciousness of the people, absence of environmental management system at the sites, inadequacies in environmental subsidies, and insufficiencies in public environmental infrastructure. Four recommendations are made to increase the effectiveness of compliance management: establishing an effective environmental compliance management system, accelerating public investment for environmental infrastructure, developing financial subsidies and incentive schemes for environmental investments, and encouraging voluntary initiatives.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Literature Cited

  • Commission of the European Communities. EU. 2001. “13,11.2001 SEC (2001) 1756”. 2001 Regular report on Turkey’s progress towards accession. Brussels

  • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) USA. 1992. Principles of environmental enforcement. Washington, DC

  • Eve E., F. A. Arguelles, P. M. Fearnside. 2000. How well does Brazil’s environmental law works in practice? Environmental impact assessment and the case of Itapiranga private sustainable logging plan. Environmental Management 26:251–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall J. 1994. Promoting voluntary compliance: Environmental auditing, outreach and incentive programme. The proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Environmental Enforcement (INECE). pp 505–515

  • IMPEL. 2001. Best practice in compliance monitoring. EU, Sweden

  • Kajura H. M. 1994. Promoting voluntary compliance: Environmental auditing, outreach and incentive programme. The proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Environmental Enforcement (INECE). pp 517–526

  • Kolk A., A. Mauser. 2002. The evolution of environmental management: From stage models to performance evaluation. Business Strategy and the Environment 11:14–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krages II, P. Bert. 1999. Environmental testing, official methods and attitude toward noncompliance. Environmental Management 24:141–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lahdelma R., P. Salminen, J. Holckanen. 2000. Using multi criteria methods in environmental planning and management. Environmental Management 26:595–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. 1992. Environmental policies in Turkey, OECD, Paris

  • OECD. 1999. Environmental performance review of Turkey, Paris

  • OECD. 2002. Working together towards sustainable development: OECD experience. Paris

  • State Planning Organization of Turkey (SPO). 1998. The national environmental strategies and action plan. SPO, Ankara

  • State Planning Organization of Turkey (SPO). 2000. Long term strategy and the eight five-year development plan 2001-2005. Ankara

  • Swanson K. E., R. G. Kuhn, W. Xu. 2001. Environmental policy implementation in rural China: A case study of Yhang, Zhejiang. Environmental Management 27:481–491

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wak R. 2000. Development of environmental indicator systems: Experiences from Germany. Environmental Management 25:613–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang M. S., Fang W., M. Bowen. 2000. An Integrated framework for public sector management in developing countries. Environmental Management 25:463–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yasamis F. D. 1989. Environmental management and planning, Ankara (in Turkish)

  • Yasamis F. D. 1995a. Basic tools of environmental management, Ankara (in Turkish)

  • Yasamis F. D. 1995b. Criteria of effectiveness for national and local environmental organizations (in Turkish). New Turkey 5:238–255

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Firuz D. Yasamis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yasamis, F.D. Assessment of Compliance Performance of Environmental Regulations of Industries in Tuzla (Istanbul, Turkey). Environmental Management 39, 575–586 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-003-0129-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-003-0129-8

Keywords

  • Compliance management
  • Enforcement
  • Turkey
  • Developing countries